Newbie 124 - Game Over

[LoudmouthLee]

PS: This game has been one of the more academic dances in Mafia... I'm enjoying this.

[loafer]

It's the whole "Mafia Buddy System" thing. You know, the thing a lot of people posted about. If you read posts in this thread other than mine, you might be aware of that. Or are you just ignoring them?... this makes me feel better about my vote.

Nobody's attacked me for that. They've attacked you, and if I quote LML, who introduced the term...

When he uses the phrase "Mafia Buddy System", he's not accusing us of being scum compatriots. He's accusing you of being a Mafia who's trying to cosy up to a pro-town role.

OBVIOUSLY.

How could you even

think

I was accusing you of that?

No, Seol, you're not a Mafia Buddy. Quite the opposite — you've been attacking a townie relentlessly all game long. What you did do was make attacks on me,

then

I adopted the turn-the-other cheek attitude,

then

LML formed the Mafia Buddy hypothesis. Then, in your second-to-most-recent post, you act like it's impossible for LML to have a valid point without you point being valid too. This is in direct contradiction to the chronology of the thread.

You want a specific example of contradictions in your attacks? There's one.

Will be going to my parents' place for the weekend. Since I don't own the computer there and the connection is signicantly worse, expect (slightly?) less activity from me.

[LoudmouthLee]

Loafter, please refer to my post #95 and respond? I'm TRYING to find reasons to unvote you, but you aren't giving me any!

[kristocker]

When he uses the phrase "Mafia Buddy System", he's not accusing us of being scum compatriots. He's accusing you of being a Mafia who's trying to cosy up to a pro-town role. I've also said I thought it was suspicious you weren't attacking me despite thinking I was continually making unjustified attacks on you. kristocker then misunderstood, and thought Lee was saying that he thought we were scum compatriots - but then went on to say she didn't see any scum-buddying, but that your behaviour towards me was a scummy ploy. What do you think I should be addressing here?

I don't think I misunderstood. I don't/didn't think that Seol and loafer are scum-budddies. I haven't seen any scum buddies in this game. I think loafer is trying to attract attention to Seol. I still think my vote on loafer is in the right place.

[big_kahunia]

Vote Count

3 loafer – (Seol, LoudmouthLee, kristocker)
2 Seol – (Thesp, loafer)
1 HotSauce – (VisMaior)
1 VisMaior - (HotSauce)

Not Voting (0):

none

With 7 alive, it’s 4 to lynch
Deadline: Saturday, July 16th at 10:00pm (est)

[Seol]

It's the whole "Mafia Buddy System" thing. You know, the thing a lot of people posted about. If you read posts in this thread other than mine, you might be aware of that. Or are you just ignoring them?... this makes me feel better about my vote.

Nobody's attacked me for that. They've attacked you, and if I quote LML, who introduced the term...

When he uses the phrase "Mafia Buddy System", he's not accusing us of being scum compatriots. He's accusing you of being a Mafia who's trying to cosy up to a pro-town role.

OBVIOUSLY.

How could you even

think

I was accusing you of that?

I read your comment as "why haven't you commented on the Mafia Buddy theory?", which was a misread, and the phrase "Mafia Buddy" has always meant to me two Mafia working together. Seeing as I'd already brought up the question of why you were being so passive prior to LML (although I didn't introduce that particular interpretation), I thought it was clear I was aware of the issues contained in that phrase.

No, Seol, you're not a Mafia Buddy. Quite the opposite — you've been attacking a townie relentlessly all game long. What you did do was make attacks on me,

then

I adopted the turn-the-other cheek attitude,

then

LML formed the Mafia Buddy hypothesis. Then, in your second-to-most-recent post, you act like it's impossible for LML to have a valid point without you point being valid too. This is in direct contradiction to the chronology of the thread.

Not quite. I misinterpreted your statement:

I am not your man, but instead a townie who is apparently in the middle of a string of play errors. Do these play errors justify a lynch? At this point, hell yes. If I was some other player in this game, I'd be attacking me too.

See, I originally thought that the "string of play errors" that "justify a lynch" was referring to more than just LML's Mafia Buddy hypothesis (which I'd describe as a single play error, not a string of, and doesn't seem to me to be justification for a lynch

on its own

). Obviously, I misunderstood you on this point.

You want a specific example of contradictions in your attacks? There's one.

It's not actually a contradiction - you could claim it's a misrepresentation, but I think it's fairly clear how I misunderstood you.

[VisMaior]

I wont be here until monday. Loafer is dangerously close beeing lynched, but he does not get the final vote. That could mean 3 things
1. he is scum, and sum doesnt want to lynch scum
2. he is innocent , and all scum is already voting fo him
3. he is innocent, but not all scum is voting for him, seeing that if no other one is lynched till doomsday, he will be the lynchee.
Id say, if we lynch him, and he is innocent, we have a good chance to have at least 1 scum in this subset: (Seol, LML, kristocker) (I still think, the other one is hotsauce)

On an other note, I wont be here till monday.

[LoudmouthLee]

See, I originally thought that the "string of play errors" that "justify a lynch" was referring to more than just LML's Mafia Buddy hypothesis (which I'd describe as a single play error, not a string of, and doesn't seem to me to be justification for a lynch on its own). Obviously, I misunderstood you on this point.

I'm, personally, still waiting on Loafer to describe WHY my vote, according to him, put him dangerously close to lynch (at 2), and Kristocker's vote (at 3) was NOT discussed.

[loafer]

Kind sir, I believe my vote on you is justified, and I'm a bit concerned that you're voting schedule is off.

I was your SECOND vote (Kristocker was your third), and I will appreciate your retractment. That is, of course, unless you're trying to bring some unneeded heat onto me.

Loafter, please refer to my post #95 and respond? I'm TRYING to find reasons to unvote you, but you aren't giving me any!

I'm, personally, still waiting on Loafer to describe WHY my vote, according to him, put him dangerously close to lynch (at 2), and Kristocker's vote (at 3) was NOT discussed.

Persistent, aren't ya?

LML, I think that your inability to predict kristocker's actions is your own weakness. She's been very close to voting for me for some time. Your vote gave the bandwagon against me enough legitimacy to get kristocker to vote for me as a direct result. Perhaps it's a little harsh for me to act like it's your fault; kristocker obviously had a part in it. However, if I had to identify a turning point in this day, it would be the point at which you voted for me. All the dynamics changed then. Perhaps you didn't

intend

for things to play out that way, but they did, as a result of your actions.

Since I anticipated kristocker's vote (once a second vote was achieved, or perhaps after the third) I think it's fair to say that, from my point of view, it was your vote that put me dangerously close to a lynch. Do ya follow?

[LoudmouthLee]

Persistent, aren't ya?

I'm not LoudmouthLee for nothing...

LML, I think that your inability to predict kristocker's actions is your own weakness. She's been very close to voting for me for some time. Your vote gave the bandwagon against me enough legitimacy to get kristocker to vote for me as a direct result. Perhaps it's a little harsh for me to act like it's your fault; kristocker obviously had a part in it. However, if I had to identify a turning point in this day, it would be the point at which you voted for me. All the dynamics changed then. Perhaps you didn't intend for things to play out that way, but they did, as a result of your actions.

Instead, I wonder if what's going on between you and Kristocker is a mafia distancing technique. ("Hey, since he's gonna be lynched anyway, I might as well be on the bandwagon!")

You could have either admitted a mistake, or spun it a different way. Instead, I get saddled with Kristocker's vote (for which I am in NO WAY accountable for). You say that the turning point in the day was my vote on you. Well, sir...

Ironically, this desire to change the pace has led to more aggression.

And, unlike Seol's attacks, I think you have a valid point. Buddying up does seem rather shady in general, especially when it's based upon something flimsy like hunches.

I'd like to think that if it weren't for Thesp's posts on transparency, I wouldn't have mentioned this hunch at all. Nevertheless, I did, and now you're attacking me for it; unfortunately, I am not your man, but instead a townie who is apparently in the middle of a string of play errors.

Do these play errors justify a lynch? At this point, hell yes. If I was some other player in this game, I'd be attacking me too. As it so happens, I'd be wrong.

So, you say that my arguments are justified, and then you attack me for voting you? Even when you say the other bolded statement on the bottom?

Why does it seem like you're running everyone around in circles?

[Thesp]

I hate it when the person I think is innocent posts all crazy.

I just don't think that if loafer were scum, he'd be posting like he has been.

[LoudmouthLee]

I will have VERY limited access the next week. Replacement is unnecessary, but do not think i'm lurking

[big_kahunia]

Day 1:
The seven of you come to the town square to debate which of you must hang. A huge argument develops between loafer and Seol. The five of you watch as one comes back a bigger and longer apologia than the next. The two see it getting nowhere and the other five contribute their thoughts. As the sun sets, it is decided that loafer is hung.

loafer, townie, has been lynched. It is now night 1. Deadline for choices are/is Tuesday July 19th 10:00pm (EST)

[big_kahunia]

Night 1:
The sun rises and six of you come together to the meeting. "Hey," one of you says, "No one died!"

It is now Day 2. Commence discussion and voting and such. With 6 alive, it's 4 to lynch.

[Thesp]

How ironic. loafer didn't get to see the cop reveal on a no-death night.

I'm the cop.

I investigated LoudmouthLee last night. He's scum.

Vote: LoudmouthLee.

[/obligatory]

[LoudmouthLee]

(sigh)

SILLY THESP!

I'm the cop

. That was a GRAND mistake. What do you have to gain from this? What are you trying to pull?

I made an investigation last night... (on someone logical), and came up with an innocent. Seol.

So, I'm assuming (since we're STILL IN A LYNCH AND LOSE SITUATION HERE!) You're scum, trying to sway the doctor into having a quick day so he/she has NO CLUE WHO TO PROTECT the next day!

Vote: Thesp

[Thesp]

I figured you'd probably claim cop.

Actually, we have a much, much better alternative here.

Unvote: LoudmouthLee.

We're

technically

not in lynch or lose, since if we lynched incorrectly, if a doc protected right, we'd still have the next day, but it's still too scary a situation to go with. Instead, this is better. We no lynch today. If the mafia kills me, we know you're scum. Conversely, if the mafia kills you, we know I'm scum. Even better, we may have a doc that protected one of us and knows the real truth. However, it's also possible the doctor protected someone else who was neither of us. A no lynch gives us either another investigation opportunity or certainty into the me vs. loudmouthlee situation.

I propose no lynch.

Also, I'm pondering whether the doc should claim and tell who they protected last night. I'm waiting to place my vote on no lynch until we can all discuss it. Thoughts?

And, for what it's worth...

That was a GRAND mistake. What do you have to gain from this? What are you trying to pull?

That's an excellent question. What would I be doing claiming cop straight out of the chute were I scum? There actually would be perfectly good reasons for me to do so were I scum (I think), but it seems you'd just rather paint me in a bad light here.

[kristocker]

Whoa.

I'm seriously not liking the odds here. If I understand it correctly, even if we no-lynch today, we will be in lynch or lose tomorrow if the mafia successfully kills tonight. So, technically, we are in lynch or lose right now. And even if we lynch correctly today, we are in lynch or lose tomorrow.

UGH!

I will be the first to state that I was trying to get a Thesp bandwagon going yesterday. The voted that ended up lynching loafer was mine based on LML's posts (and my own feelings - not placing all the blame on LML.) So I don't know who to trust right now.

If the doc claims, we would have two confirmed innocents (the doc and the protected person.) The more innocents we know of in a lynch or lose situation, the better it is for the town.

As for a doc claim, I think it is a great idea,

only if we decide to no-lynch today

. If we no-lynch, we go into night with 6 people and probably come out with 5 - 3 townies and 2 mafia. That is textbook lynch-or-lose, no questions asked. But the town still has a chance.

If the doc claims and we mislynch, we enter night with 5 people and come out with 4 - 2 townies and 2 mafia. Game over, mafia wins.

Another alternative is that the doc can claim and we lynch correctly. This leads to 5 going in, 4 coming out - 3 townies, 1 mafia. But I'm not comfortable enough at this time that we will lynch correctly to advocate this choice.

If I have missed a scenario, please point it out. These are the only possibilities I see.

[HotSauce]

Whoa.

I'm seriously not liking the odds here. If I understand it correctly, even if we no-lynch today, we will be in lynch or lose tomorrow if the mafia successfully kills tonight. So, technically, we are in lynch or lose right now. And even if we lynch correctly today, we are in lynch or lose tomorrow.

UGH!

I will be the first to state that I was trying to get a Thesp bandwagon going yesterday. The voted that ended up lynching loafer was mine based on LML's posts (and my own feelings - not placing all the blame on LML.) So I don't know who to trust right now.

If the doc claims, we would have two confirmed innocents (the doc and the protected person.) The more innocents we know of in a lynch or lose situation, the better it is for the town.

As for a doc claim, I think it is a great idea,

only if we decide to no-lynch today

. If we no-lynch, we go into night with 6 people and probably come out with 5 - 3 townies and 2 mafia. That is textbook lynch-or-lose, no questions asked. But the town still has a chance.

If the doc claims and we mislynch, we enter night with 5 people and come out with 4 - 2 townies and 2 mafia. Game over, mafia wins.

Another alternative is that the doc can claim and we lynch correctly. This leads to 5 going in, 4 coming out - 3 townies, 1 mafia. But I'm not comfortable enough at this time that we will lynch correctly to advocate this choice.

If I have missed a scenario, please point it out. These are the only possibilities I see.

We could also have a cop too right? (2mafia, 1 cop, 1doc, 2 townies)

So wouldn't that mean, if we doc claim we'll have two known innocents, we no-lynch to be safe from a mis-lynch, that gives less people for the cop to investigae.

[LoudmouthLee]

As of right now, Thesp, I have no reason to unvote you.

You claimed MY role.

[kristocker]

We could also have a cop too right? (2mafia, 1 cop, 1doc, 2 townies)

So wouldn't that mean, if we doc claim we'll have two known innocents, we no-lynch to be safe from a mis-lynch, that gives less people for the cop to investigae.

I was using "townies" in the generic, non-mafia way. Unless LML and Thesp are both lying, we should have a cop out there. So you have brought up another good reason for the doc to claim if there is a no-lynch.

[Thesp]

As of right now, Thesp, I have no reason to unvote you.

Yes, because you're not acting in the town's best interests. You have every reason to see a lynch carried through today.

[Seol]

Actually, we have a much, much better alternative here. Unvote: LoudmouthLee. We're technically not in lynch or lose, since if we lynched incorrectly, if a doc protected right, we'd still have the next day, but it's still too scary a situation to go with. Instead, this is better. We no lynch today. If the mafia kills me, we know you're scum. Conversely, if the mafia kills you, we know I'm scum. Even better, we may have a doc that protected one of us and knows the real truth. However, it's also possible the doctor protected someone else who was neither of us. A no lynch gives us either another investigation opportunity or certainty into the me vs. loudmouthlee situation.

I propose no lynch.

And what happens if we no-lynch and we wake up with someone dead who isn't you or Lee? Even if I'm dead, that doesn't prove Lee's the cop, as if he's scum he knows that anyway. Sure, we'll have another investigation, but we

still

won't know which cop to trust. No-lynch is, as far as I can see, not going to help us here.

We're not quite on lynch-or-lose today, because even if we lynch wrong the doc might protect successfully overnight (although the field has been narrowed). Our best solution at the moment is probably to lynch a cop claimer.

This way, we have a 50-50 chance of hitting scum. If we hit, we also get another investigation. If we miss, we then know who to lynch tomorrow... if the doc gets lucky, and there's enough of us townies to outvote the scum (if the doc fails, it's 2 townies to 2 mafia, which is a Mafia autowin).

So basically, that gives us about a 50% chance of victory. Time to scour Thesp and LML's posts...

[LoudmouthLee]

I hate it when the person I think is innocent posts all crazy.

I just don't think that if loafer were scum, he'd be posting like he has been.

This, here, is a very interesting Thesp post. Tell me, Thesp, why you thought he was innocent? He seemed the most scummy.. unless, of course, you were playing along with it.

[VisMaior]

Actually, I still see a possibility of no cop setup. What if Thesp and LML is our scum? If we believe the one, and do a no lynch, they just forced us in a LyLo situation. If we believe the other and lynch scum, we basically have to believe the other one is innocent.

On the other hand, I do not see what Thesp would gain claiming cop beeing mafia, if LML is not mafia. Tha fact that he picked out LML makes the scenario that LML is the cop, and Thesp the mafia highly improbable.

So, there are 2 possibilities: Thesp cop LML mafia, or both mafia.
Is there something I missed?

FOS LML